Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Jarod that is one of the biggest over reactions I have EVER read online. Which says a lot! Why do you even need a review now or really any review? It comes out Friday, go and see it if you want and than form an opinion. You could even read reviews the day of the release before you decide to go!

We all enjoy free speech in this country. Any reviewer granted an early screening is free to tell us all about it. But by doing so, they will guarantee that no studio will ever invite them to another early screening, ever.

It is a mutual relationship. The studios grant early access to the journalists, who in turn honor the studios' requests to hold the reviews until a certain date. No big deal.

__________________
"In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this world to those who are its worst."

We all enjoy free speech in this country. Any reviewer granted an early screening is free to tell us all about it. But by doing so, they will guarantee that no studio will ever invite them to another early screening, ever.

It is a mutual relationship. The studios grant early access to the journalists, who in turn honor the studios' requests to hold the reviews until a certain date. No big deal.

And I don't agree with that.

Donald Draper wrote:

Why do you even need a review now or really any review? It comes out Friday, go and see it if you want and than form an opinion. You could even read reviews the day of the release before you decide to go!

That's not even the point, Donald. I don't read early reviews at all. But I find the idea of an embargo on reviews, and that reviewers are blindly accepting that gag ordering of greedy studios/companies, incredibly stupid.

We all enjoy free speech in this country. Any reviewer granted an early screening is free to tell us all about it. But by doing so, they will guarantee that no studio will ever invite them to another early screening, ever.

It is a mutual relationship. The studios grant early access to the journalists, who in turn honor the studios' requests to hold the reviews until a certain date. No big deal.

And I don't agree with that.

Donald Draper wrote:

Why do you even need a review now or really any review? It comes out Friday, go and see it if you want and than form an opinion. You could even read reviews the day of the release before you decide to go!

That's not even the point, Donald. I don't read early reviews at all. But I find the idea of an embargo on reviews, and that reviewers are blindly accepting that gag ordering of greedy studios, incredibly stupid.

No one forces the reviewers to sign and agree to the embargo. Sure if they don't agree to it they don't get to see and thus review the movie but no one is forcing their hand. The studio has the right to protect its IP and how information about it is released prior to when it officially is available. Publishers of books and studios do the same thing with DVD releases, the retailers are under restrictions on when they can put the book/item on the shelf.

Now, sure, they can do it early if they wanted to but then they'd suffer consequences most likely being that particular distributer not working with them anymore. It's an all agreed upon process by both parties who know what they are getting into.

If you're a movie reviewer you know going into a private screening you're not going to be allowed to discuss things until a certain time. If you don't like it no one is making you go to the screening. If you DO go to the screening you're making the choice to agree to the contract, terms, and conditions of the screening.

All of this is an agreement between two independent entities and is nothing like Nazi Germany as you alluded to earlier.

No one forces the reviewers to sign and agree to the embargo. Sure if they don't agree to it they don't get to see and thus review the movie but no one is forcing their hand. The studio has the right to protect its IP and how information about it is released prior to when it officially is available. Publishers of books and studios do the same thing with DVD releases, the retailers are under restrictions on when they can put the book/item on the shelf.

Now, sure, they can do it early if they wanted to but then they'd suffer consequences most likely being that particular distributer not working with them anymore. It's an all agreed upon process by both parties who know what they are getting into.

If you're a movie reviewer you know going into a private screening you're not going to be allowed to discuss things until a certain time. If you don't like it no one is making you go to the screening. If you DO go to the screening you're making the choice to agree to the contract, terms, and conditions of the screening.

That's not even the point, Donald. I don't read early reviews at all. But I find the idea of an embargo on reviews, and that reviewers are blindly accepting that gag ordering of greedy studios/companies, incredibly stupid.

They aren't "blindly" accepting. Their eyes are WIDE open. This isn't a big deal. You comparing movie reviews to Nazi Germany is just silly.

Wouldn't say I "agree" with it, but I don't disagree with it. I'm indifferent to it overall. There's no harm behind it, it's an agreement between two parties and its under no coercion by a government entity, and the "dominant' entity (the studio) certainly has their reasons behind it (not wanting plot details out early, not wanting negative press too early, etc) the submissive entity (the screeners) goes into it willingly knowing the terms of the agreement and consequences of breaking it.

It's harmless. Boo-hoo, I don't get to read what Ebert or the local paper has to say about this movie until Friday. I think I can handle that.

It's an absurd comparison because what Hitler did -as ruler of a body of people and a population- in order to control the flow of information and how it was presented is a very, very different than Warner Brothers telling The New York Times, "Hey, do you mind waiting until Friday of the release date to put up a review of our movie? We don't want too much information out too soon, okay?"

Jesus, there's mountains out of molehills then there's making Olympus Mons out of molehills.

Once again anyone reviewer could say "What, the fuck, I going to post it right away!". The studio goons are not going to show up at their door. It will just affect future business dealings.

I used to clean offices at a cheese factory. My employer was an outside contractor. We all had to sign confidentiality agreements. That we would not reveal intellectual property we heard or saw to outsiders.That was actuallyl more limiting than than this situation. They eventually are allowed to reveal what they saw. This is common and no big deal.

Oh and the place I cleaned (in Plymouth, WI....) was full of fucking slobs... Oh shit the Cheese Police are going to get me.

Civilization as we knew it ended a couple of weeks ago with the Supreme Court ruling on healthcare reform. The civilization that replaced that one was strangled in its crib by TDKR movie review embargoes. At the rate we're going through civilizations, we're going to run out.

I used to clean offices at a cheese factory. My employer was an outside contractor. We all had to sign confidentiality agreements. That we would not reveal intellectual property we heard or saw to outsiders.That was actuallyl more limiting than than this situation. They eventually are allowed to reveal what they saw. This is common and no big deal.

LOL, am I seriously the only one who sees the difference between reviewing a finished product and releasing internal information?